Earlier quoted context omitted.
As far as I know, Apple has never used Linux for anything in any capacity. OSX's kernel is XNU, and it's a hybrid of BSD code and Mach.
So OSX has nothing to do with unix/linux?
[deleted]
20 years ago, Apple bought NeXT
71–80 of 267 posts
Re: 20 years ago, Apple bought NeXT
#72If only Scott Forstall had started a visionary company, that could be acquired revitalize Apple.
Re: 20 years ago, Apple bought NeXT
#73The standard snark is that NeXT bought Apple for -$400 million.
When I joined Apple Software Engineering in 2001 as a writer, the first thing I noticed was that former NeXT people ran the company, made the important decisions, and believed fervently that the new Apple would be wildly successful. Oh, how right they were.
Re: 20 years ago, Apple bought NeXT
#74My father's most regretted financial move is ignoring his weird thought to buy 10 shares of Apple stock at this time.
Whenever I start to think like this, I remind myself that it's about as useless as thinking "if only I bet it all on 00" at the roulette table. Crystal balls that see the future are certainly in short supply. But if I had one there's a lot better ways to make money than using it to buy 10 shares of Apple 20 years ago.
Yall being unfair to GP. His dad had the impulse at the time.
Re: 20 years ago, Apple bought NeXT
#75Earlier quoted context omitted.
Whenever I start to think like this, I remind myself that it's about as useless as thinking "if only I bet it all on 00" at the roulette table. Crystal balls that see the future are certainly in short supply. But if I had one there's a lot better ways to make money than using it to buy 10 shares of Apple 20 years ago.
> Crystal balls that see the future are certainly in short supply. Yes, but Apple, from 1999 until Jobs died at least, and for some time more, gave people opportunity after opportunity to buy a constantly sky-rocketing stock. If someone didn't see it with the first iMac (1999 IIRC), they should have seen it with the iPod. If not, then with the iPhone. They had many chances to buy that stock.
Yes, but again, this is in hindsight. For all you knew back then, it could crash at any time, and any other company could also skyrocket.
The point is, right now, any of the hundreds of startups you see just starting now /could/ potentially be the next Facebook. Statistically, most won't be. But of course in 20 years, you won't remember thinking about buying stocks for all the companies that failed. You'll only remember how you once considered buying stock fort his one company that is huge now.
Re: 20 years ago, Apple bought NeXT
#76My father's most regretted financial move is ignoring his weird thought to buy 10 shares of Apple stock at this time.
Whenever I start to think like this, I remind myself that it's about as useless as thinking "if only I bet it all on 00" at the roulette table. Crystal balls that see the future are certainly in short supply. But if I had one there's a lot better ways to make money than using it to buy 10 shares of Apple 20 years ago.
That's an utterly ridiculous comparison. Companies / stock prices are not a normal, random distribution like roulette results.
There are masses of information available on companies / stock market. Assuming roulette wheel is fair, there is none other than 1/32 chance known.
Re: 20 years ago, Apple bought NeXT
#77My father's most regretted financial move is ignoring his weird thought to buy 10 shares of Apple stock at this time.
10 shares of AAPL in 1996 isn't that large of a windfall today. The stock has had 3 splits 2:1,2:1,7:1 in that time frame. 10 shares in 1996 would have had a cost of $7.50 and a present market value of ~$32,000.
Well, $7.50 in 1996 dollars is apparently worth $11.67 today in 2016.
$32,000 doesn't sound like too bad a return.
Re: 20 years ago, Apple bought NeXT
#78Earlier quoted context omitted.
None of the tech really mattered, not much anyway. What Apple really got with NeXT was Steve Jobs' vision, along with a more seasoned CEO better capable of realizing that vision. Whether Apple had gotten BeOS or NeXT didn't really matter all that much in comparison.
This is demonstrably false. MacOS Copland was scrapped in favor of a descendant of NeXTSTEP that became MacOS X. Hundreds (thousands?) of API calls in both Desktop iOS development are prefaced NS_ ... that is NeXTSTEP
This internal demonstration of NeXTSTEP shows just how much this similarity applies to what the end-user sees in macOS/OS X as well:
Re: 20 years ago, Apple bought NeXT
#79My father's most regretted financial move is ignoring his weird thought to buy 10 shares of Apple stock at this time.
There was a magazine called MacAddict which I'm sure some here would remember. One of their mid-90s Christmas gift recommendations was Apple stock! I sometimes wonder how many small fortunes those few paragraphs created.
Re: 20 years ago, Apple bought NeXT
#80>> What came out of this deal not only saved Apple and the Mac, but made the iPhone, iPad and more possible as well. What prevents Apple from making the iPhone and iPad? They could have bought Palm, QNX, did something based on Linux... What was the key? BSD? Objective-C? I don't see those being that important. The one thing NeXT did enable them to do was the PowerPC to Intel switch.
The other way to look at it is Palm, QNX, and Linux technology never became as successful as NeXT technology in the mobile space. They could have bought those technologies and made them successful or maybe NeXTStep was the key. My observation of the smartphone market is that Moore's law always wins. Microsoft knew that from the start; they build a mobile OS (Windows CE) designed more for future devices rather than cu…
cough, linux, cough, android, cough .....